hbase-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ted Yu (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (HBASE-5778) Turn on WAL compression by default
Date Fri, 14 Dec 2012 23:12:13 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5778?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13532772#comment-13532772

Ted Yu commented on HBASE-5778:

Thanks for the reminder, J-D.
My question becomes: shall we introduce TestWALReplayUncompressed ?
Running the patch on Linux I got:
testSimplePutDelete(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.replication.TestMasterReplication)  Time elapsed:
0.12 sec  <<< FAILURE!
java.lang.AssertionError: Waited too much time for put replication
  at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:93)
  at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.replication.TestMasterReplication.putAndWait(TestMasterReplication.java:276)
  at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.replication.TestMasterReplication.testSimplePutDelete(TestMasterReplication.java:213)
queueFailover(org.apache.hadoop.hbase.replication.TestReplication)  Time elapsed: 0.119 sec
java.lang.AssertionError: Waited too much time for queueFailover replication. Waited 17533ms.
  at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:93)
  at org.apache.hadoop.hbase.replication.TestReplication.queueFailover(TestReplication.java:765)
For ReplicationHLogReaderManager.java:
+public class ReplicationHLogReaderManager {
Please add annotation for audience and stability.
For readNextAndSetPosition():
+   * Get the next entry, returned and also added in the array
Please phase the above line so that it is easier to understand.
> Turn on WAL compression by default
> ----------------------------------
>                 Key: HBASE-5778
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-5778
>             Project: HBase
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Jean-Daniel Cryans
>            Assignee: Jean-Daniel Cryans
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 0.96.0
>         Attachments: 5778.addendum, 5778-addendum.txt, HBASE-5778-0.94.patch, HBASE-5778-0.94-v2.patch,
HBASE-5778-0.94-v3.patch, HBASE-5778-0.94-v4.patch, HBASE-5778-0.94-v5.patch, HBASE-5778-0.94-v6.patch,
HBASE-5778.patch, HBASE-5778-trunk-v6.patch
> I ran some tests to verify if WAL compression should be turned on by default.
> For a use case where it's not very useful (values two order of magnitude bigger than
the keys), the insert time wasn't different and the CPU usage 15% higher (150% CPU usage VS
130% when not compressing the WAL).
> When values are smaller than the keys, I saw a 38% improvement for the insert run time
and CPU usage was 33% higher (600% CPU usage VS 450%). I'm not sure WAL compression accounts
for all the additional CPU usage, it might just be that we're able to insert faster and we
spend more time in the MemStore per second (because our MemStores are bad when they contain
tens of thousands of values).
> Those are two extremes, but it shows that for the price of some CPU we can save a lot.
My machines have 2 quads with HT, so I still had a lot of idle CPUs.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira

View raw message